Trending
The Mirror's Oct. 19 editorial dealing with a housing proposal for the former Keith Junior High School athletic field urged city officials to seek input from people residing near that property.
The editorial emphasized "it is better for the proposal to be fully aired at some point before final decisions are forthcoming than to have misunderstanding and/or anger undermine what might be the best alternative available."
Even before that editorial had been published, two neighbors of the property in question had reached out to express concern and opposition regarding the proposal.
They expressed the importance of preserving green space and voiced fears revolving around the topic of low-income housing, if that option was among the ideas being considered.
The Keith athletic field issue has opened a proverbial window for looking back one month to a Mirror article in September headlined "Homeless advocates seek to create low-barrier shelter."
Over the long run, that proposal might prove to be a more formidable hard-sell than what Keith portends to be. For people unfamiliar with the topic, here is how a Sept. 27 Mirror article described it:
"A low-barrier shelter could accommodate homeless people who can't meet admission standards designed to protect residents and staff at Altoona's recently constructed family shelter, which conducts background checks and requires sobriety, medical stability, an ability to manage daily living tasks, willingness to live cooperatively with others, mental and emotional stability and willingness to comply with other rules."
While some local residents might recognize the need for a low-barrier shelter here, many others might vehemently oppose it, for reasons so obvious that listing those points here is unnecessary.
The main point is that, as with the Keith athletic field issue, the low-barrier proposal needs much scrutiny and discussion, going forward.
Although it is reasonable to presume that most of the people who would be deemed candidates for low-barrier accommodations are not bad people, those who are bad people could undermine the good that the shelter would hope to achieve.
It is reasonable to judge that the shelter would not be welcome in most sections of this city, despite Altoona's reputation as a caring community. Again, scrutiny and discussion, as well as consideration of past experiences with the kinds of people who would be eligible for the shelter, will be essential.
Christine Zernick, executive director of the Blair County Community Action Program, favors a shelter such as Pittsburgh's Second Avenue Commons shelter, which has 95 beds and 43 single-room occupancy units - although the shelter here presumably would be of much smaller scale than Pittsburgh's.
Nevertheless, such a shelter is less "visible" in a city of Pittsburgh's size than what it would be in Altoona. That must be factored into the local discussion, especially about where it would be ideal to locate the local shelter.
Besides the issue of where such a shelter could be located, those who hope that such a shelter will be forthcoming are exploring possible funding sources, which might or might not pose a formidable challenge.
Referring to the proposed shelter, Zernick said, "It's in the infancy stages (but) I'm telling you we're going to get this done."
Residents will be watching for future developments on this and the Keith athletic field issue closely.